You are using now denigrating comments instead of answering simple questions. You are not even explaining what is wrong with the quote you took from the previous comment. The poster never said "Julia is better at every possible thing", but you are totally saying that about python by pretending it is not a chore and a difficult learned skill to write fast python numerics.
Yes, we all know that if you program in a very particular way (basically by not using any of the great dynamic or introspective features) you get fast python. How is it not objectively better to have a language that is fast independently of whether you use its dynamic/introspective/metaprogramming features?
"Python is fast as long as I program in this very particular and very constrained way" is a silly way to defend python (which is nonetheless an amazing language).
Julia has a ton of "zero cost abstractions". Python, as great as it is, simply does not.
Yes, we all know that if you program in a very particular way (basically by not using any of the great dynamic or introspective features) you get fast python. How is it not objectively better to have a language that is fast independently of whether you use its dynamic/introspective/metaprogramming features?
"Python is fast as long as I program in this very particular and very constrained way" is a silly way to defend python (which is nonetheless an amazing language).
Julia has a ton of "zero cost abstractions". Python, as great as it is, simply does not.